Skydiving affordable in the future?

[bastichu 0]

hello friends,
this year ticket prices were marked up at my home dropzone here in germany.and if you have a look at the development of gasoline prices i fear that skydiving could become too expensive in the future!
please tell me what do you think about it!

blueskies sebastian

http://www.ziehleine.de -> SKYSPORTS

[riggerrob 643]

Rising gasoline prices will eventually make skydiving too expensive.
I just hope that it does not happen in my lifetime.

Think about it this way: automobiles and piston-engined airplanes compete for the same 100 octane gasoline. Only X number of barrels of 100 octane come out of oil wells every year.
When the supply of 100 octane decreases - as it inevitably will - then car owners and airplane owners will compete price-wise for the same gallon.
Now consider how many million people drive cars every day and consider how many billions of dollars they spend.
There are two hopes for continued skydiving: the first is turbine engines burning "alternative" fuels and the second option is BASE.
Turbines (and diesels) are far easier to convert to alternate fuels. Basically turbines will burn anything you can pump through injectors. The down-side is that those conversions require post-doctoral degrees in thermo-dynamics and a pile of FAA paperwork exceeding the gross weight of the airplane.


Current jump ticket prices are artifically low, so enjoy them while you can.

[feuergnom 29]

Quote

I just hope that it does not happen in my lifetime.

guess you had your fair lot of jumping, didn't you? us younger folks will see it happen. my guess it won't take very long

so enjoy the party while you can. i surely will

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[jdoggchief 0]

I don't skydive (can't afford it being a college student) but I've often worried about this problem. But here's one possible solution: check out the December 2005 Scientific American, in the Scientific American 50 awards section. Some people made an alcohol-powered crop duster and they said it would be possible to convert existing airplane engines to running on alcohol. Alcohol would be a renewable fuel because it can be made from corn.

[billvon 3,029]

>i fear that skydiving could become too expensive in the future!

For some, true. But I have a feeling the people who really want to do it but can't afford it will do the same thing they do now - teach, coach, work manifest etc to earn their jumps.

[rehmwa 2]

Naw, if enough of us get together, we can vote it so that the government pays for us all.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[feuergnom 29]

Quote

For some, true. But I have a feeling the people who really want to do it but can't afford it will do the same thing they do now - teach, coach, work manifest etc to earn their jumps.

who are we going to manifest teach or coach or even pack for if tickets are to expensive for the average joe skydiver?

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[John4455 0]

I have been skydiving for almost nine years. In that amount of time the price of a turbine jump ticket at my home DZ has increased 50%.

How do ya like it Johnny?

[billvon 3,029]

>I have been skydiving for almost nine years. In that amount of time
>the price of a turbine jump ticket at my home DZ has increased 50%.

I've been jumping for 15, and in the first 10 or so, prices were relatively flat. The Ranch had its $13 to 13,000 deal for most of that time. It's only been the past 5 years that have seen prices really increase around here, primarily due to fuel costs.

[AndyMan 7]

The cost of jump tickets in the US is somewhere around $20-25 now. What price point is too expensive to jump?

Let's say prices doubled. Let's say jump tickets cost $40-$50. Would you still jump? Would others? Remember that that's the current price of jumping in Japan, and some parts of Europe where jumping is still popular. I think it's clear that even if US jump prices were $40-$50, many people would still jump regularly. Many wouldn't, but still - many would.

So lets take this arbitrary number as a hypothetical point at which a lot of people stop jumping. How expensive would jet-fuel have to get before jumping got this expensive?

Well, it's commonly accepted that Otters burn roughly two gallons of jet fuel per jumper on a normal lift. At current prices - $3/gallon, that means each jumper burns roughly $6 of fuel on every load. Airplane leases tend to eat up around $12/slot.

So consider these two scenarios:

lease                                       $12.00

fuel per passenger (gal)                      2

cost of fuel                                 $3.00

cost of slot: (lease + fuel cost*fuel use)   $18.00

price of slot:	                             $22.00

profit:	                                     $ 4.00


lease                                        $12.00

fuel per passenger (gal)                       2

cost of fuel                                 $17.00

cost of slot: (lease + fuel cost*fuel use)   $46.00

price of slot:                               $50.00

profit:                                      $ 4.00

So, with all other numbers staying the same, we would need to have $17 jetfuel before the price of a single jump would double. The price of fuel would literally need to more than quadrouple before we'd get $50/ jumps.

While I have no doubt that jet fuel will some day cost $17/gallon, I don't hear any forcastors speculating that'll happen any time soon. When it does eventually happen, inflation will dictate that we all make a lot more money then we do now anyways, so we'll be in better shape to afford it.

Skydiving is clearly a rich (wo)mans sport. It will continue to be that, too - but it will be within the reach of a great many people for a long time to come, even with radically more expensive fuel costs.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[simplyputsi 0]

What kind of fuel do balloons use. And the more I think about it blimps should be the jump ship of the future. I think you could put a fair amount of people on one and I don't think they use too much fuel. Now I don't know how much a blimp costs, but it's an idea. Could have storage problems with it I guess. I am talking out of my ass again. sorry.

Skymama's #2 stalker -

[John4455 0]

Yeah the rising fuel cost have really hurt. I've also noticed a huge increase of Instructors and coaches at the DZ, along with fun jumpers making fewer jumps.

How do ya like it Johnny?

[John4455 0]

My problem is that my salary is not increasing at the same rate as the fuel. This question is something I have been struggling with personally. That is, how much is too much?
As for now I have just decided to cut back.

How do ya like it Johnny?

[ChrisL 2]

Quote

hello friends,
this year ticket prices were marked up at my home dropzone here in germany.and if you have a look at the development of gasoline prices i fear that skydiving could become too expensive in the future!
please tell me what do you think about it!

blueskies sebastian

Become too expensive??, I made my first jumps in 1989. It was already too expensive.

Today its absolutely appalling, but I continue to pony up the bucks.

__

My mighty steed

[billvon 3,029]

>What kind of fuel do balloons use.

Propane for hot air balloons.

>And the more I think about it blimps should be the jump ship of the future.

Blimps use helium for buoyancy and engines for climb/descent.

>I think you could put a fair amount of people on one and I don't
> think they use too much fuel.

Blimps are awful at climbing rapidly with heavy loads, and are worst at the scenario you describe - climbing heavy and descending light.

OTOH, an aerostat might work well. An aerostat is a balloon that 'hovers' at altitude, either via active control or passive anchors (i.e. ropes.) Put one at 8,000 feet, attach an elevator that can take 5 people at a time, and you've got an instant DZ.

[Jumpah 0]

Quote

OTOH, an aerostat might work well. An aerostat is a balloon that 'hovers' at altitude, either via active control or passive anchors (i.e. ropes.) Put one at 8,000 feet, attach an elevator that can take 5 people at a time, and you've got an instant DZ.

On that note, I come across stuff about a space elevator from time to time. Here's one article:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast07sep_1.htm

The jump ticket would be hellishly expensive, tho...

[NelKel 0]

_________________________________________

Someone dies, someone says how stupid, someone says it was avoidable, someone says how to avoid it, someone calls them an idiot, someone proposes rule chan

[bastichu 0]

ok, that means that we should enjoy skydiving as long as it's possible and hope that new ways of getting an airplane into the air will be found or rather use alternative vehicles like balloons!
thanks for your replies,

sebastian

[tombuch 0]

Ticket prices aren't that outrageous.

When I started active skydiving in about 1981, jumps were USD 1.00 per thousand feet, with most jumps from a Cessna at 7,500, for USD 7.50. A super-high jump from 12,000 feet was USD 12.00. Using the CPI calculator at the Federal Reserve site at: http://minneapolisfed.org/Research/data/us/calc/index.cfm that same 12,000 foot jump would cost $25.69 in 2005 dollars.

The first top of the line rig I bought back in 1982 was a System (piggy back) with a Unit (square main) and a TriCon (round reserve), at a cost of 850.00. The rig was used, but had only about 7 jumps on it. That calculates to $1,714.09 in 2005 dollars. I bought a brand new Mirage container in 1985 for $535.00, and that would be $1,145.34 in 2005 dollars. My first Raven Main and Reserve were purchased in 1985 at a cost of $588.00 each, and that would be $1,063.43 each in 2005 dollars.

My first altimeter was an Altimaster II that cost $89.00 in 1982. That would be $179.48 in 2005 dollars. The first available audible altitude warning device was a Paralert, and I bought one in 1983 for $89.00, a purchase that would cost $173.89 in 2005 dollars. My first new state of the art jumpsuit, a SFR Flite Suite with all the options was $140.00 in 1982, and that would be $282.32 in 2005 dollars.

Back in 1983 I started jumpmastering static line students at $5.00 each. That would be $9.77 in 2005 dollars.

My book, JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy has a list price of $14.95 today. Using the CPI calculator, that same book would have cost $5.58 on the day I made my very first skydive in 1979. That first jump, a static line with six hours of ground training, was selling for $40.00 with a college I.D., and that would be $107.22 in 2005 dollars. I actually got my first jump free, and the CPI calculator tells me that would be $0.00 in 2005 dollars, so at least some things don't change!
.

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[Dolph 0]

I'm not sure it's a rich man's sport. It's all about priority.

If you want a house, a boat, a big new Mercedes and send your kids to the best college while saving good money for your pension, you need to be rich.

If you live in a small apartment, no car, no kids and have a normal paying job, ya have the funds.

It's more about the amount of available fun-money than the total amount of money earned/in the bank I think. I'm definitely not rich and I spend money at the same rate I'm making it. I've cut a lot of (in my view) unnecessary costs away and can live comfortably doing around 500 jumps a year using the prices of today.

A doubling of jump prices would mean half as many jumps per year for me. I'd still jump though.

Interesting stuff Tom, thanks for sharing. Inflation tends to be forgotten when the cloud of nostalgy descends :).

[ripcord4 0]

I don't worry about Avgas price so much as I do the onerous cost of the equipment involved in todays jumping. I recently priced out a new rig and it came to over $6,000 and it was not top of the line canopies. Close, but not quite. Needless to say, my MC-4 suddenly looked much better. Skydiving is hard on a retiree's budget!

[Eule 0]

Quote

Some people made an alcohol-powered crop duster and they said
it would be possible to convert existing airplane engines to running on
alcohol.

Yes, it is fairly simple to run reciprocating engines on alcohol instead of
gasoline/petrol. If all you do is change the carburetion, your "gas
mileage" will go down, since alcohol has a lower energy content than
gasoline. You can do things like raise the compression ratio (mill the
heads or install heads with smaller chambers, install domed pistons)
to get some of the power back.

Quote

Alcohol would be a renewable fuel because it can be made from
corn.

How to make alcohol from corn:

1. Fill tractor with diesel. Plow field.
2. Refill tractor with diesel. Plant corn.
3. At intervals, refill tractor with diesel, and spray (petroleum-
derived) fertilizer and pesticides on corn.
4. Fill combine and truck with diesel. Harvest corn with combine,
load it into truck.
5. Drive truck to refinery and unload corn for processing.

It turns out that you get less energy back from the grain alcohol than
you put in by running diesel in the tractor, combine, and truck. In
other words, you should have just run the diesel in your airplane (or
car, or whatever) in the first place, instead of fooling around with the
corn.

IMHO, any further improvements in reciprocating aircraft engine
efficiency are probably going to come from electronic fuel injection -
not mechanical as some aircraft have now. Yes, it's expensive,
complicated, etc. It's also a fairly proven technology - we have
about 35 years of experience with analog electronic fuel injection
and about 25 years of experience with digital electronic fuel injection.

Beyond that, I agree with riggerrob that the next step is probably a
turbine engine run on something other than petroleum-derived diesel.
(I think reciprocating diesel engines will probably always be too heavy
to be practical in an airplane, but I could be wrong.) The energy content
of biodiesel is high enough that you end up getting back more energy
than you put in to make it. I am 100% sure that the various air forces
already know how to do this, because they can't always count on fresh,
filtered, lemon-scented Jet-A to run their aircraft on. I'm about 75%
sure that GE, Pratt-Whitney, etc have run alternative-fuel experiments
on the bigger turbines that go in commercial aircraft, and a lot of that
will probably translate to the "little" turbines in jump planes.

If you're a fan of free markets, and you want to see more development
of alternative fuels, then one of the better things that can happen is
for the price of oil to go way up and stay that way. That way, it's a lot
easier to justify throwing money at engineers and chemists to develop
better engines and better fuels, instead of just buying more oil. It's
not a requirement, but it also helps if the political climate is in your
favor. For some reason, there was a lot of federal funding for alternative
energy in the late 1970s, but hardly any from about 1981-1993. By
the mid-90s, oil was cheap again, and nobody cared. I know, I know,
Speaker's Corner is ------> that way.

Tom makes a good point about inflation. I would also add: there is
no other product that has its current price displayed 24 hours
a day on electrically lit signs every few blocks. If all grocery stores had
signs out front with the price of bread or eggs, people would complain
about how much those things cost.

This article on energy, fuels, alternative energy sources, etc may be
interesting. I don't agree with all of the opinions or conclusions, but I
think it's a good overview of the basic science involved.

Eule

PLF does not stand for Please Land on Face.

[billvon 3,029]

>It turns out that you get less energy back from the grain alcohol
>than you put in by running diesel in the tractor, combine, and truck.

Nope. That may have been true 40 years ago, but today the amount of energy contained in a gallon of ethanol is more than twice the energy used to grow the corn and convert it to ethanol. Which means that if you run your tractor, combine and truck on ethanol you make, you can still sell over half your crop.

Some yields:

Jerusalem artichokes: 1200 gallons/acre/year (3 harvests/year)
Sugar cane: 555
Sorghum: 500
Sugar beet: 412

Biodiesel is even better; you get about 3x the energy back that you put into it, primarily because a) some oil crops are nitrogen-fixing and require less fertilizer, b) there's no fermentation, and c) there are commercial uses for the byproducts (cattle feed and soap.)

Some biodiesel yields:

Rapeseed: 110 to 145 gal/acre/year
Palm oil: 650 g/a/y
Algae: 10,000 g/a/y

>(I think reciprocating diesel engines will probably always be too heavy
>to be practical in an airplane, but I could be wrong.)

http://www.diamond-air.at/en/products/DA42/index.htm

[simplyputsi 0]

Now blimps used to take a lot of people around places back in the WWII days. The link is to a nine passenger blimp. Says it can climb max 1600ft/min. Half of that is pretty descent. Problem is you only have 9 peeps. That just as many as a porter though. Now just need the statistics on fuel consumption. Not sure what the descent rate is though, is it the same as ascent? Problems are how high can it go? Winds will knock that sucker around real nice I'd think. Uppers at 50knots sorry no jumping today. Well maybe hop and pops can use it.

http://www.sanyo.com/aboutsanyo/blimp_about.cfm

Skymama's #2 stalker -

[candace 0]

ha, it's freak'n expensive enough as it is